OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Columbia City Council Pension Fund Actuarial Valuation and Investment Update - June 3, 2026

Video ArchiveWednesday, June 3, 2026
BodyColumbia, Missouri
SessionVideo Archive
DateWednesday, June 3, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:01:54

Transcript — Verbatim
0:09

We've got one item on our agenda first off, please require pension action value report.

0:16

Uh, and then we have a couple things into closed session.

0:18

So I'm gonna go ahead and assume I'm kicking this over to Jim or Matthew and McCall, Matthew, whichever wants to grab the microphone.

0:28

All right.

0:30

Okay, so we're gonna present the actual report.

0:33

So we have Nita and Heidi from GRS, and they're gonna kind of go over the report, and then afterwards we have Mark Shigowski and David Sears from UBS, they're our investment portfolio managers, and they're just gonna talk a little about a little bit about the investments as well.

0:50

So uh Mita and Heidi, if you guys are uh on and can hear us, uh, we'll let you get started.

0:59

Our video is disabled for some reason.

1:02

Okay, so the host has the level songs.

1:06

All right, thanks, Mark.

1:07

We'll get that to take care of it.

1:13

To share my screen.

1:15

I don't know.

1:16

Yes, you might show you how they can see that's a lot of technological advanced.

1:23

Um I don't know, we have to accept it, I guess.

1:27

Somebody accepts it on that side of the table.

1:36

So mayor, is this an hour?

1:38

Yes.

1:39

Okay, thank you.

1:42

I need to be oriented.

1:45

Can everybody see it?

1:47

Yes.

1:51

Okay.

1:52

Well, uh, good afternoon, everyone.

1:54

Uh, my name is LesMeads well and presenting with me today is my associate.

2:00

Heidi Barry.

2:02

We are from Gabriel Rotterdam Company, and we are the actuaries for the police and fire retirement fund.

2:10

Heidi and I are very pleased to have the opportunity to present the September 30th 2025 actual evaluation results of the retirement fund.

2:21

If we can turn to slide two, Heidi.

2:25

The purpose of the annual actual evaluation is twofold.

2:31

One is to determine the employer contribution rates for both the police group as well as the fire group for the fiscal year ending September 30th, 2027.

2:44

And the second very important reason is to measure the funding progress in relation to the actual cost contributing.

2:52

And that's just a fancy way of saying what portion of the actual recruit liabilities, which means the liabilities associated with service that the police members and the fire members have already earned as of September 30th, 2025.

3:12

What portion of those liabilities are covered by what we call the funding value of assets.

3:38

Okay, this graph is meant to kind of give you an idea of part of the benefit of prefunding a system.

3:50

So if you look at the green bar that's increasing over time, those are your benefits being paid out of the system.

3:59

That's what we would call a typical pay as you go.

4:02

And benefits are actually ready to be paid the system is paying it as it um occurs.

4:11

In a pre-funded plan, at the very start of the plan, you're receiving employee and employer contributions, even though no benefits are being paid, and that money is being invested.

4:24

So when you look at the horizontal line, which is the level payment below that horizontal dotted line is your employee and employer contributions coming in.

4:37

So at the beginning of the plan, you can see to the left, not paying out as much in benefits as the contributions that are coming into the system.

4:46

When you look at the section above the dotted horizontal blue line and the green lines, that is the amount of investment income that we are expecting to be able to help offset the employee and employer contributions to pay for benefits and expenses being paid out.

5:09

So that's why it's really important to pre-fund.

5:15

Now when we perform the actual evaluation, there are a lot of different variables that we need to take into account when we're calculating the employer contributions and the rest of the results that you see in that actual valuation report.

5:30

We need to look at the census data, the uh asset data, and then um, well, in terms of the census data, we're looking at your active members who could potentially receive a benefit in the future.

5:44

We're looking at retirees and beneficiaries who are currently receiving benefits, and then terminated vested members who may have maybe entitled to a benefit sometime in the future.

5:58

The other three things we're looking at are benefit provisions, what the system is actually planning on paying its members when they retire, the actual assumptions, we need to make assumptions about things because we don't know what's going to happen in the future.

6:18

So we have to make assumptions about when people retire, when people will die, how many people will quit and will they be eligible for benefit, or will they just receive their refunded contributions?

6:31

A lot of different assumptions that we need to make to uh determine the cost, and then we need an actual funding method, and this is how you pay or the system pays for those benefits over time.

6:45

So there were no benefit provision changes, actual assumption or funding method changes.

6:51

So I'm gonna focus on the census and asset data that we received as of September 30, 2025.

7:00

So first, when we look at the active number, we do have it split out between the police and the fire funds.

7:06

So for police, there was a big change in the active member population from 2024 to 2025.

7:16

Uh, you can see the number went from 136 active members to 153, and this does include drop numbers as well.

7:26

The payroll increase from 11.6 million to 12.5 million.

7:31

That was a pretty large increase of about 8.4 percent overall.

7:36

And then when you look at the fire group, you can see a little bit different.

7:41

We see that the number actually decreases from 2024.

7:45

So we had 168 active numbers, and that decreased to 163, and the total payroll actually decreased slightly from 13.6 million to 13.3 million.

7:58

So those become important later on when we get into the actual results.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Fiscal Sustainability██████████████████████████████████34%
Pension Planning█████████████████████████████████33%
Procedural████████████████████20%
Public Safety████████████12%
Pending Litigation1%
Summary of Proceedings

Columbia City Council Pension Fund Actuarial Valuation and Investment Update - June 3, 2026

The Columbia City Council met on June 3, 2026, to review the annual actuarial valuation of the Police and Fire Retirement Fund as of September 30, 2025, and to receive an update on the fund's investment portfolio from UBS. The meeting concluded with a motion to enter closed session to discuss legal matters and employee negotiations.

Discussion Items

  • Actuarial Valuation Presentation: Nita and Heidi from Gabriel, Roeder, Smith & Company (GRS) presented the actuarial evaluation results. Key data points:

    • Active police members increased from 136 to 153, with payroll up 8.4% to $12.5 million.
    • Active fire members decreased from 168 to 163, with payroll down slightly to $13.3 million.
    • Market value of assets as of Sept 30, 2025: $224 million. Investment return for the year was 9.3%, exceeding the 6.25% assumption.
    • Funded ratios: Police 53% (up from 51% in 2024), Fire 61% (up from 57%), total fund 58%.
    • Employer contribution rates for fiscal year 2027: Police decreased from 46.57% to 43.93%; Fire decreased from 60.56% to 59.17%. In dollar terms, estimated contributions of $5.8 million for police and $8.3 million for fire.
    • The actuaries noted that the amortization period for unfunded liabilities is 26 years. If shortened to 21 years, the contribution rates would be 48.28% for police and 64.35% for fire.
    • An experience study is recommended prior to the next valuation (Sept 30, 2026) to review assumptions.
    • Council members asked about typical funded ratios and the difference between an actuarial audit and an experience study. The actuaries explained that there is no standard target, and that public safety funds often have lower funded ratios due to higher pay increases and earlier retirement patterns.
  • Investment Portfolio Update: Mark Shigowski and David Sears from UBS presented the portfolio performance.

    • Total portfolio value: $238 million as of end of May 2026.
    • Calendar year-to-date return (through May): +4.19% (up $9.6 million).
    • Fiscal year-to-date return (since Oct 1, 2025): +6.39%, exceeding the 6.25% actuarial assumption.
    • The portfolio is diversified across fixed income, equities (U.S. and international), and alternative investments, using both index funds and active managers.
    • UBS provided a market outlook, noting strong earnings momentum and the potential for a "peace dividend." They highlighted that the current market is driven by fear of missing out on peace and robust corporate earnings.
    • Discussion on the city's additional $1 million contribution: UBS noted that the decision to continue that practice rests with the city, not the investment managers.

Key Outcomes

  • The council received and filed the actuarial valuation and investment update; no formal vote was taken on the reports.
  • The council voted unanimously (7-0) to enter closed session under Missouri statutes to discuss legal actions and negotiations with employee groups.
  • The actuaries recommended an experience study before the next valuation, which the board will consider.
  • The council discussed the possibility of shortening the amortization period to increase contributions and improve the funded status, but no formal action was taken.

Meeting Transcript

We've got one item on our agenda first off, please require pension action value report. Uh, and then we have a couple things into closed session. So I'm gonna go ahead and assume I'm kicking this over to Jim or Matthew and McCall, Matthew, whichever wants to grab the microphone. All right. Okay, so we're gonna present the actual report. So we have Nita and Heidi from GRS, and they're gonna kind of go over the report, and then afterwards we have Mark Shigowski and David Sears from UBS, they're our investment portfolio managers, and they're just gonna talk a little about a little bit about the investments as well. So uh Mita and Heidi, if you guys are uh on and can hear us, uh, we'll let you get started. Our video is disabled for some reason. Okay, so the host has the level songs. All right, thanks, Mark. We'll get that to take care of it. To share my screen. I don't know. Yes, you might show you how they can see that's a lot of technological advanced. Um I don't know, we have to accept it, I guess. Somebody accepts it on that side of the table. So mayor, is this an hour? Yes. Okay, thank you. I need to be oriented. Can everybody see it? Yes. Okay. Well, uh, good afternoon, everyone. Uh, my name is LesMeads well and presenting with me today is my associate. Heidi Barry. We are from Gabriel Rotterdam Company, and we are the actuaries for the police and fire retirement fund. Heidi and I are very pleased to have the opportunity to present the September 30th 2025 actual evaluation results of the retirement fund. If we can turn to slide two, Heidi. The purpose of the annual actual evaluation is twofold. One is to determine the employer contribution rates for both the police group as well as the fire group for the fiscal year ending September 30th, 2027. And the second very important reason is to measure the funding progress in relation to the actual cost contributing. And that's just a fancy way of saying what portion of the actual recruit liabilities, which means the liabilities associated with service that the police members and the fire members have already earned as of September 30th, 2025. What portion of those liabilities are covered by what we call the funding value of assets. Okay, this graph is meant to kind of give you an idea of part of the benefit of prefunding a system. So if you look at the green bar that's increasing over time, those are your benefits being paid out of the system. That's what we would call a typical pay as you go. And benefits are actually ready to be paid the system is paying it as it um occurs. In a pre-funded plan, at the very start of the plan, you're receiving employee and employer contributions, even though no benefits are being paid, and that money is being invested. So when you look at the horizontal line, which is the level payment below that horizontal dotted line is your employee and employer contributions coming in. So at the beginning of the plan, you can see to the left, not paying out as much in benefits as the contributions that are coming into the system. When you look at the section above the dotted horizontal blue line and the green lines, that is the amount of investment income that we are expecting to be able to help offset the employee and employer contributions to pay for benefits and expenses being paid out. So that's why it's really important to pre-fund. Now when we perform the actual evaluation, there are a lot of different variables that we need to take into account when we're calculating the employer contributions and the rest of the results that you see in that actual valuation report. We need to look at the census data, the uh asset data, and then um, well, in terms of the census data, we're looking at your active members who could potentially receive a benefit in the future. We're looking at retirees and beneficiaries who are currently receiving benefits, and then terminated vested members who may have maybe entitled to a benefit sometime in the future. The other three things we're looking at are benefit provisions, what the system is actually planning on paying its members when they retire, the actual assumptions, we need to make assumptions about things because we don't know what's going to happen in the future. So we have to make assumptions about when people retire, when people will die, how many people will quit and will they be eligible for benefit, or will they just receive their refunded contributions? A lot of different assumptions that we need to make to uh determine the cost, and then we need an actual funding method, and this is how you pay or the system pays for those benefits over time. So there were no benefit provision changes, actual assumption or funding method changes.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com